You start. I’ll follow.
I’ll take that as a no.
2 Likes
First they tried to hide the fact that it is lossy… Then they claimed that the lossy “folds” are in the barely audible frequency range… Now they’re trying to claim its about protecting the Studio’s IPR… Stereophile is totally complicit in all this B.S from MQA, that really makes me sick after reading the article.
3 Likes
Well for what it’s worth from someone with no axe to grind I thought the article was interesting and not at all biased in the way that it is being portrayed by some here.
I think this may be a case of shooting the messenger.
You may not like what Jim says but it doesn’t mean a lot of it isn’t accurate. I don’t see his article as being overly supportive of what is happening, rather an attempt at a realistic assessment of what is happening.
YMMV as they say.
.sjb
7 Likes
+1. I think Jim is doing his level best to offer an in depth description of MQA and it’s potential consequences, good and bad. And he’s doing that while trying to navigate through a minefield of opinions with no shortage of unnecessary emotion.
3 Likes
I can’t wait for Roon to support MQA so we can declare what we hear with our ears instead of speculating.
1 Like
What?
We have been able to listen to fully decoded MQA through Roon for several years.
Needs an MQA capable DAC. From $200.
Not with Bluesound… waiting lol
1 Like
Can’t wait for Roon to support unfolding of MQA as my DAC is not MQA and don’t yet believe MQA is worth more of a monetary investment.
Can’t you do that now with the Tidal app? For comparison purposes, you shouldn’t be using any Roon DSP anyway so you could make those comparisons now.
Yes, but doesn’t having a spinning disc in the same room as my system cause audio problems? That is why Roon has an ecosystem that puts the core in another room, right?
Out of interest, how many people questioning the audible benefits of Roon have actually heard it? And out of them, how many have heard it on a fully MQA capable system (such as Meridian 5200SE) playing the same recording (same master) back to back with the standard PCM?
I would suggest a calibration here.
People talk of the hard disk proximity issue, but it is certainly not a huge issue. Not clear if it is audible in you system (you can easily test that).
In my view, this is a typical audiophile issue where people discuss whether it is really audible, like audiophile Ethernet cables.
I argue that if MQA is in the same category, “maybe it is audible, maybe not”, it isn’t worth the trouble.
That is my point. Hooking a MacBook up to my DAC brings in too many variables to judge whether or not MQA makes a difference. For me, MQA is like Ethernet cables at this point.
It’s easy to see if MQA itself makes a difference and remove other variables. I’m sure a friendly Meridian dealer would accommodate you for the afore-mentioned demo.
Unless they will let me take the DAC home and swap it, I don’t think I’ll be able to tell. Aren’t we told the only way to test something is to test it in our own system?
All good dealers accommodate home demos.
Hello James,
Firts: MQA never stated that the format improves the quality of sound.
It secures the origine of the sample. So: Playing MQA you always know what the maximum capabilities are of the sample and the bit-rate.
Thats it. That in the end you always will have te maximum quality of the digital file is due to the process and not to the used technique.
Looking at the problems you’ve had with the tweeter: Look at the adjustment in Roon for Volume. I use the -23 LUFS setting. You’ll be more than surprised what will happen.
For more on this, see “The War on Loundness”.
I own 5200SE speakers and don’t question the audible benefits. Most often the MQA version of the same recording sounds demonstrably better to me. Sometimes it is produced from a different master than the Red Book release and sounds sensational by comparison.
I’ll just have to enjoy my hi-fi hobby while I can before MQA Ltd. destroys the world as we know it.
2 Likes